- BerserkerBarage
- |
- Exalted Mythic Member
MY LOVE FOR YOU IS LIKE A TRUCK...
Posted by: Langley
--on another note, I think MLG Chewhatever is an idiot.
Posted by: Achronos
There is a reason I am user ID 1 and my account creation date is before this site came online.
Even if, and that's a big IF, Bungie made it so that the bullet spread each time had the same random properties you could still lose a BR fight because the other person's bullets appear to be "less random". Here's what I mean, let's say that each person's bullet #1 has a set definite randomness of .1 and bullet 2 is .2 and bullet 3 is .3. This random factor is the measure of how far the bullet deviates from the center of the reticule when fired. However, this measure is only the distance of deviation (scalar) and certainly not the direction of deviation (vector). There is no set standard of direction of deviation currently in the game and most certainly aren't suggesting it.
Meaning, that if your opponent is strafing from your left to your right and the direction of deviation of the bullet spread causes it to deviate to the left of your reticule you could miss additional shots. However, if your opponent is shooting at you while you are strafing from right to left and his direction of deviation makes his bullets spread left (ie "leading" you in your strafe) he could hit more shots than you even though the random deviation of the bullet spread is the same. Many people are arguing for a constant or reduced spread value range. It still wouldn’t make much of a difference than how it is now. The difference between a .15 and a .30 can be incredibly slight because it doesn’t make any distinction of the direction of that variation. Assuming that lowering the random spread range or making the deviation a constant amount will somehow make the game more reliable is operating upon a false assumption. Quite the non sequitur fallacy. As such it is incredibly wrong.
Now as to the part about the BR being listed as a medium to far range weapon. To me, it fits those criteria. The BR is effective in short, medium, and far ranges. You can shoot people pretty damn far with the BR, meaning that it is within its effective range. The difference comes between the "effective" range and what I call "ideal" and what Bungie calls "intended" range. While the shotty might be able to hit someone that is standing 10 feet away from you making it within its effective range, that obviously is not it's "ideal" or "intended" range. You could with enough shots kill someone with the shotty from that distance, however it's probably not a good idea. Likewise with the H3 BR the total "effective" kill range is rather large, since you can kill people at longer ranges, however to expect to be able to do so on a consistent basis is illogical. You are operating the weapon outside of its "ideal"/"intended" range and while it can still be effective it is far less likely to produce results. The "ideal"/"intended" range of the BR so that the bullet spread is indifferent is still outside of the "ideal"/"intended" range of all close quarter weaponry. The H3 BR is a medium to far range weapon however to achieve the best results you should operate the weapon within certain parameters (ie the "intended" range).
In addition the Assault Rifle IIRC is listed as having short to medium range. Why doesn’t the AR fire consistently at all of its listed range? The AR should fire and hit exactly the same at close and medium range if Bungie lists it as a close and medium range weapon in its description. I demand that if Bungie is going to list a weapon as having diverse range groups that it OBVIOUSLY work the same way in all of those range areas. Oh wait, that’s why the H2 BR was broken. Because it was a hitscan weapon and that regardless of range the weapon didn’t suffer any effectiveness reduction for it. However, there are countless other weapons in Halo 3 that don’t work the same way or as effectively in all ranges they can work in. The description simply gives the general area in which the weapon can be effective. The BR can be effective at short, medium, and far ranges. However, it’s ideal range is obviously somewhere in the middle. The AR is obviously effective and short and medium distances but obviously is ideally used in short range.
I would mention that all real-life weaponry have these designations. They list the total effective range of the weapon and the ideal range of the weapon. Take for example one of my personal favorites the USMC M40A3. It fires a 7.62x51MM NATO and has an "effective" range of up to 1000 yards. However, the listed "ideal" range is 200 yards shorter at 800 yards in a pristine scenario. While it is possible for the rifle to shoot 200 yards further than it's ideal range the ability to hit a target with any certainty is almost null. So while the weapon is effective up to 1000 yards the ideal or intended range of the weapon tops out at 800 yards in perfect conditions. Again, I know most of you don't like "realism" arguments or examples, but it isn't surprising to me that a rifle in a video game would have a larger "effective" range compared to its "ideal" range.
If MLG has a problem with how Halo 3 is developing why don’t they make their own game or contract out to a developer to make a game for them? It’s obvious that people at MLG fancy themselves as game developers. They've created maps, gameplay modifications, spawn points, weapon placements, etc. in Halo 3. They even promoted the use of glitches in Halo 2 which then increased the likelihood of people cheating in Halo 2. Thanks for that MLG.
Again, if MLG has a problem with how things are going...why not make their own game? They apparently think KKC is a good map designer (laughs hysterically) and they apparently think they know what makes good weapons balance (laughs hysterically) and apparently they think they know how the best way to play a FPS is (laughs hysterically). Again, nothing is stopping them from either making their own game or contracting out to a developing company to make the game for them.
But then again they're not going to do that. They'd much rather just take an existing game and twist it to meet most of their demands. They much rather just be parasitic when it comes to game development. What I think is rather humorous is that fact that Bungie allows them a considerable amount of adjusting in H3 via Forge that all other FPS right now don't allow. You can't adjust the speed of players in R6V2 or GOW. You can't adjust where they spawn or where weapons are placed. And for all the leeway that Bungie has given them with Halo 3, it still isn't enough to pacify them. Which is exactly why they should either develop their own game or realize that they aren't some spoiled child that's going to get everything they ask for.
Speaking of spoiled children, let's talk about DanBauer. You know what…it’s not worth it…moving on…
If I see one more person say that the “casual” community won’t notice and/or care about adjusting the BR to make it more “competitive” I swear to Jebus I will punch a kitten. That is the most idiotic thing I think anyone could say and in my opinion anyone who would make such statement is so far past brain-dead they ought to just turn them into Soylent Green now. While casual players might not be as vocal as their competitive counterparts that doesn’t mean they don’t realize when things change in gameplay. Just like the competitive players picked up on the fact that the H3 BR was different; it there was an alteration that made it “more competitive” essentially more “dominant” it would certainly affect ALL of the game, from competitives down to casuals. Making the H3 BR stronger by eliminating the bullet spread would be a tremendous mistake. One I’m glad Bungie has indicated that they have no intention of doing. We all saw how “adding” something that “aids” the BR in H2 destroys weapons balance. Animation glitches made it so the BR because a much more effective weapon. And look how quickly it dominated weapons balance and gameplay.
[continues]